Breaking Down Barriers: Eunuchs in Italy, 400-620

(November 30 AABS 18)

Eunuchs are one of the most recognizable and remarkable

features of Byzantine civilisation. The Byzantine period is
marked by the essential roles that castrates played at all levels
of court society. Though their primary function throughout the
Byzantine era remained service within the imperial palace,
eunuchs served as diplomats, assassins, and political leaders,
led armies and played essential roles within the Church as
well. For many non-Byzantine peoples throughout the Middle
Ages, eunuchs came to symbolize both the allure and the
otherness of Byzantium.

Todays paper has two primary objectives. First, by

concentrating attention on evidence from Italy, it will show
more congruent attitudes towards eunuchs within the Eastern
and Western halves of the Roman Empire than some scholars
allow. Second, I intend to demonstrate that a lessoning of
hostility towards eunuchs from the fifth century can help to
explain both the rise of Byzantine military eunuchs and the
respect for the Byzantine eunuch-general Narses found in
Byzantine and non-Byzantine sources.

Let us begin by tracing briefly the prominent and diverse roles

that eunuchs were playing at the opening of the fifth century.

Modifying older views, recent scholarship has convincingly

shown that eunuchs had become prominent within the entire
Roman Empire from at least the third century, not the fourth
as previously argued. Although castration in the early
Byzantine period remained illegal within the boundaries of the
Empire, at the dawn of the fifth century, Eunuchs were an
everyday sight on the streets of Rome and Constantinople. To
borrow the words of Shaun Tougher, court eunuchs were an
imperial phenomenon, not an oriental one.1
Yet the seeming gender ambiguity of eunuchs could be
troubling.2 One finds this sentiment expressed in a late fourthcentury Eastern source describing eunuchs as exiles from the
society of the human race, belonging to neither one sex nor
the other.3 The very ease by which a man could quite literally
be cut off from the source of his sexual identity troubled
many Late Roman writers. At the opening of the fifth century

1 Shaun Tougher, The Eunuch in Byzantine History and Society (New York: Routledge,
2008), 42.

2 Mathew Kuefler, The Manly Eunuch: Masculinity, Gender Ambiguity, and Christian
Ideology in Late Antiquity (Chicago: 2001), 31-36, 61-69, 96-102, 245-282.

3 Claudius Mamertinus, Speech of Thanks to Julian 19.4.

3

the poet Claudian quipped that the knife makes males

womanish.4
These sentiments help to explain some of the hostility towards
eunuchs found in the ancient literature. One recent scholar
has gone so far as to suggest that the indefinite gender status
of eunuchs symbolised to some Late Roman men the frailties
and instabilities of the Late Roman gender system. 5
A frequently gendered and negative view of eunuchs appears
to have been particularly prevalent at the close of the fourth
century; a time when relations between the Western and
Eastern halves of the Empire dramatically broke down.
Claudian (ca. 370 404 AD), a native Greek-speaker from
Alexandria based in Italy, crafted a famously hostile portrait of
the Eastern eunuch-general and consul, Eutropius. The poets
gendered invective In Eutropium (Against Eutropius)
lambasted the Eastern Romans for allowing an unmanly
eunuch to take on the hyper-masculine duties of a military
commander and consul. When describing the shame of having
a eunuch leading Roman armies the poet lamented, Sister
4 Claudian, In Eutropium 1.48.
5 Kuefler, Manly Eunuch, 36.
4

shall we ever have the power to cure the East of effeminacy,

Will this corrupt age never stiffen up? 6 To those in
Constantinople who had allowed a eunuch to fight, he scolded
To leave arms to men.7
Of course, as a propagandist for Stilicho and the Western
regime, Claudian naturally went a bit over the top in
denigrating a rival from a then hostile Eastern court. 8
However, several Eastern sources criticized Eutropius with
similar hostile rhetoric.9 Easterners too could be critical of
what they saw as Western Romans over-dependence on
eunuchs. For example, Eastern writers complained about the
abundance of scheming eunuchs at the court of the Western
emperor Honorius.10
So too did Claudians contemporary, and fellow Eastern migr
to Rome, the ex-soldier and historian, Ammianus Marcellinus,
6 Claudian, In Eutropium 2 112-114: Nedum mollitiia, nedum, germana, mederi
possumus Eoae? numquam corrupta rigescent saecula? (trans. Kuefler).

7 Claudian, In Eutropium : 1 281: arma relinque viris (trans. Platnauer).

8 For this rivalry see, Alan Cameron, Claudian: Poetry and Propaganda at the Court of
Honorius (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1970).

9 See, e.g. Eunapius frag. 64, 65. 1-7, Zosimus, New History 5.38-18, Marcellinus Comes,
Chronicle 396.

10 Ammianus, Res gestae 31.11.1; Eunapius, frag. 47;Zosimus, New History 4.22.
5

decry the large number of eunuchs in the city.11 Ammianus

lamented that whereas their Roman forefathers had acted as
skilful directors of battles leading their brave and manly
soldiers, many of the nobility of his day instead spent their
time arranging banquets and assembling bands of eunuchs,
whom he disparaged as troops of mutilated men. Having
abandoned the political and military offices that had helped
them to both hone and express their own manliness, these
aristocrats could no longer be expected to lead real soldiers
into battle, but merely command eunuchs.12
So we can see that belittling eunuchs was not purely a Western
phenomenon. Neither was hostility towards eunuchs universal.
Even the renowned persecutor of castrates, the fourth-century
emperor Julian, had admitted that he owed his manly
deportment and love of classical literature largely to his
eunuch childhood tutorwho was probably a Goth. Ammianus
provides several examples of good eunuchs. Though
admittedly, if I was a eunuch I may not have been all that
flattered by his backhanded compliment that, Among the
11 For the close association of the term mollitia softness with effeminacy, see Craig Williams, Some
Remarks on the Semantics of mollitia Eugesta, 3 (2013): 240-63.

12 Ammianus, Res gestae 14.6.17 (trans. Hamilton).

6

brambles roses spring up, and among the savage beasts some
are tamed.

13

Unfortunately eunuchs have not left us their own views.

Moreover, similar to ancient women, much of the hostile
rhetoric hurled at eunuchs served as literary devices whereby
the ancient authors could attack their main targets. For
example, Claudian used Eutropius to attack the Eastern Court,
whilst Ammianus set his sights on certain members of the
upper stratum of the Roman aristocracy. Not coincidently
bad eunuchs are generally found in the reigns of bad
emperors or serving evil men or women.14 Certainly one should
be careful not to overstate the negative and gendered attitude
toward eunuchs in this periodand much counter evidence
could be provided to show a general level of acceptance for
eunuchs. Nevertheless no other eunuch after Eutropius would
be named consul, and as far as we know, it would not be until
the reign of Justinian in the sixth century that another eunuchgeneral would lead a large Roman army.

13 Ammianus Res gestae 16.7.4-8.

14 Tougher, Eunuch, 126.
7

The use of eunuchs, however, only accelerated in the fifth

century. Eunuchs played essential, and at times, dominate
roles in the fifth century politics that reshaped the Empire.
They planned internal and external affairs, brought about the
rise and fall of great men and women, and sought to play a
part in the Christological disputes that rocked the fifth-century
Church. For these nuanced roles they could face both criticism
and praise.15
One also finds eunuchs performing what can be described as
martial duties. Unable to procreate, eunuchs had originally
been utilised to perform duties within the intimate regions of
the palace. This quite naturally had over time seen them being
pressed into service as imperial guards. Emperors and their
eunuchs often had a symbiotic relationship. Fifth-century
emperors had grown to depend upon their eunuchs for their
protection. Largely dependent upon the reigning emperor for
their survival, eunuchs were naturally quite loyal and
protective servants. Eunuchs trusted role in the emperors

15For depictions of Theodosius IIs heavy reliance on court eunuchs, and in particular,
the dominance of his spatharius Chrysaphius in internal and external politics and
Christological controversies, see e.g., Priscus, frag. 3, 11, 13, 15.2; Theodoret, Ep. 110;
Vita of Daniel the Stylite, 31; Marcellinus Comes, Chronicle s.a. 450; Malalas, Chronicle,
363, 368; Evagrius, HE 1.10, 2.2; Theophanes, A M 5738, 5740, 5943.

entourage saw them perform the ultimate act of devotion, the

elimination of the emperors enemies.

(Valentinian III)
Eunuchs took part in two of the fifth centuries most infamous
political assassinations. The first occurred in 454 when the
9

thirty-six year old Western Emperor Valentinan III and his

grand Chamberlin Heraclius ambushed the seminal Western
generalissimo Aetius at a financial meeting in Ravenna. 16
Having slain the famous conqueror of Attila, neither
Valentinan nor Heraclius had much time to bask in their
victory, and Aetius supporters murdered the pair shortly
afterwards. Valentinians assassination of a war hero and
reliance on his eunuch advisor to perform the deed provoked
an almost universally hostile response, and it is probably no
coincidence that Sidonius writing in the years shortly after the
infamous assassination described the emperor as a mad
eunuch [semivir amens].17

16 Priscus, frag 30.1.13-27.

17 Sidonius Carmina 7.359 (trans. Anderson).
10

In 470, the Eastern Emperor Leo I utilised similar tactics when

his armed eunuchs hijacked the long-serving Alan general and
senior consul in Costantinople, Aspar and his sons, at a
meeting of the Eastern senate. Unlike, his Western counterpart
though a close callLeo and his eunuchs emerged
unscathed, though the emperor earned from his critics the
disparaging nickname the butcher for the killings. Their role
in the successful purge of Aspar, probably explains why during
the reign of Leos successor, Zeno, we find a eunuch leading a
small military expedition against the emperors rivals. 18
So too does one find eunuchs performing their familiar roles
in some post-Roman kingdoms. Eunuchs served in Vandalic
North Africa and in Ostrogothic Italy.19 This image of the
sarcophagus of one of Theoderics eunuch-chamberlains, Seda,
adds credence to Jonathan Arnolds recent contention that
Theoderic sought to present himself as a new Western
Roman emperor, and not just a barbarian rex.20 By this period

18John of Antioch, 211.1.

19 For the fascination with North African eunuchs found in Vandalic literature, see A. Merrills and R. Miles,
The Vandals (Oxford: Blackwell. 2010), 108.

20 Jonathan Arnolds Theoderic and the Roman Imperial Restoration (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2014), 90.

11

nothing said imperial Roman so much as a contingent of

eunuchs. Therefore, Theoderics reliance on eunuchs may have
served as one way to proclaim his imperial Romanitas. The
presence of eunuchs in Otrogothic Italy may also provide an
explanation for why in the wide array of gendered invective
hurled at the Eastern Romans by the Ostrogothic supporters
during Justinians Gothic war, none of it, as far as we know,
mentions the emperors reliance on eunuch commanders. 21 It
is to the most famous of these eunuch generals, Narses that
we now turn.

21 A full account of this gendered propaganda is found in, Walter Kaegi, Procopius the Military Historian,
BF 15 (1990): 79-81; M.E. Stewart, Contests of Andreia in Procopius Gothic Wars, 4 (2014),
pp. 21-54.

12

Narses (478-573) has long earned historians respect. 22 This

acclaim is deserved since his major victories over the Goths in
552 and versus the Franks in 554, secured Justinians (ruled
527-565) retaking of Italy from the Goths.23 So too did Narses
perform admirably for twelve years as prefect of Italy. Narses
was a eunuch of Pers-Armenian descent born around 478-480.
He had first served Justinian and Theodora as a chamberlain
(cubicularius); ultimately, attaining the top post available to a
court eunuch, the position of grand chamberlain (praepositus
sacri cubiculi). He also was a treasurer (a favourite position
for Byzantine eunuchs) and later served as bodyguard
(spatharius). He also served as an assassin for the Empress
Theodora.24
Narses was one of three eunuchs to command Byzantine
armies during Justinians reign. The first, Solomon, served as

22 See e.g., Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (London: Penguin
Classics,1994),4.36; J.B. Bury, History of the Later Roman Empire from the Death of Theodosius I to the Death
of Justinian (London Macmillan, 1958), pp. 267-80; Lawrence Fauber, Narses the Hammer of the Goths (New
York: St. Martins Press, 1990), p. 135; John Martyn, The Eunuch Narses, in Text and Transmission in
Medieval Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge Scholarly Publishing, 2007), pp. 46-56.

23 Modern military historians, for example, have rated Narses as a better general than his rival Belisarius. See
e.g., Bevin Alexander, How Wars are Won: The 13 Rules of War from Ancient Greece to the War on Terror (New
York: Three Rivers Press, 2002), pp.49-52.

24 Procopius revealed that in 541, the Empress Theodora had sent Narses to assassinate the praetorian prefect
John the Cappadocian Procopius, Wars 1.25.24-30.

13

magister militum and praetorian prefect of Africa.25 Another

eunuch, Scholasticus, commanded an army sent against the
Slavs.26 Though never as high as some suppose, the number of
eunuch-generals expanded in subsequent centuries.27
Importantly, in contrast to the gendered vitriol that had
accompanied Eutropius military command against the Huns at
the close of the fourth century, Narses and these other
eunuchs prominent military commands, as far as we know,
provoked little or no hostile response.28
One finds in the sixth-century histories of Procopius and
Agathias, for instance, that Narses status as a castrate did
little to hinder his military prowess. Agathias, in fact, took
seeming pleasure in rejecting this trope by depicting two
warriors in a Frankish army assuming foolishly that they would
best the Romans in battle because a eunuch of the
bedchamber commanded their army. Guided magnificently by

25 See e.g. Procopius, Wars 4.11.47-56.

26 Procopius, Wars 7.40.5.
27 For a select prosopography of eunuchs in Byzantine civilisation, see Tougher, Eunuch,
pp. 133-71

28
14

Narses, the Roman army annihilated the Franks.29 Agathias

attributed this and other Roman victories to Narses excellent
generalship.30The lesson? Non-Romans who underestimated
eunuchs and their role in the Roman military machine were in
for a big surprise.
Procopius

and

Agathias,

Ringroses

contention

that

however,
neither

undermine
historian

Kathryn
attributes

Narses success to courageous manliness. Examples from both

demonstrate the opposite. Procopius, for instance, reported
with little sense of irony that Narses supporters hoped that
the eunuch would achieve fame through deeds of wisdom and
manliness [ ].31 Agathias too
described Narses as manly and heroic [
].32 With his remark, that true nobility of soul
29 Agathias, Histories 1.6.8, 1.22.6.
30 Agathias, Histories 2.9.1.
31 Procopius, Wars 6.18.7. I have changed the translator Dewings courage for
to manliness. Procopius also described (Wars 3.9.25) the emperor Justinian as
(sharp, clever). Eunuch-commanders after Narses continued to face hostile
gendered rhetoric. See e.g., the eleventh-century historian, John Skylitzes (A Synopsis
of Byzantine History16.8 [trans. John Wortley]) recording a Byzantine rebel commanders
snide remark that facing a non-eunuch rival general, for the first time the fight would be
against a true soldier, one who knew well how to conduct military operations with
courage and skill; not, as formerly, against pitiful fellows, eunuchs, fostered in the
chamber and raised in the shade. One suspects that Narses would have faced similar
gendered criticism if he had been defeated in battle by the Goths.

32 Agathias, Histories 1.16.12 (my trans.).

15

cannot fail to make its mark, no matter what obstacles are put
in its path, it seems clear that Agathias would have placed
Narses on or near the top of his ladder of human excellence. 33
Moreover, martial virtues had never centered solely on courage or physicality alone. In the
words of Agathias, Brains and not brawn represented the primary qualities of an effective
Roman general. Procopius too criticized generals for risking themselves fighting on the
frontline.34 These attitudes need not surprise. Byzantine military handbooks, in fact, preferred
it when military commanders avoided combat.35 Moreover, men with little or no military
background could lead Byzantine armies. The Italian senator Liberius, described by
Procopius as an old man and without experience in deeds of war, had for a timealbeit
ineffectually led Justinians Italian campaign.36

Procopius and Agathias showed their readers that it was the

combination of Narses brains with his soldiers brawn that
had led to the Byzantines final victories over the Goths.
Indeed, one should not suppose that Narses did not put
himself in danger during these battles. Despite the eunuchs
diminutive stature, Agathias described Narses on horseback
leading his men into a skirmish against the Franks. 37 Narses
age (he was over seventy during the events depicted in book 8
of Procopius Wars) more than the fact that he was a former
33 Agathias, Histories 1.16.2.
34 See e.g., Procopius, Wars 5.18.5.
35 Maurices Strategikon 2.16.
36 Procopius, Wars 7.39.7
37Agathias, Histories 1.21.5. For Narses small, frail body, see Histories 1.16.2.
16

court eunuch probably represented the primary reason that

Narses did not play a larger role in combat. Procopius
certainly depicted Solomon, leading cavalry charges and
fighting on the frontlines with his men.
So why did Justinian use eunuchs as military commanders?
The emperors reasoning for doing so appears multi-faceted.
His break with recent precedent may have been a practical
decision based on the reality that Solomon and Narses were
the best qualified to lead. Solomon may have set the
precedent. Narses loyalty, financial acumen, and ability to
attract the loyalty of his men all served as possible reasons. 38
Fear of usurpation appears to have played a role as well. While
Procopius only insinuated, Agathias made it clear that
Justinian felt threatened by the conqueror of the Vandals
Belisarius growing popularity.39 The fifth and early sixth
centuries had seen Roman and non-Roman soldiers playing
increasingly important roles in both the making and the

38 Shaun Tougher points out this possibility in his paper on Narses that he kindly allowed
me to see before publication.

39Procopius, Wars 6.30.1-5; Agathias, Histories 5.20.5. Historians continue to debate just
how viable a rival Belisarius was, see e.g. Henning Brm, Justinians Truimph und Belisars
Erniedrigung beriegungen zum Verhltnis Zwischen Reich,Chiron (2013): 63-91.

17

unmaking of Roman emperors.40 By appointing Narses,

Justinian therefore removed the real threat that a charismatic
and corporeally intact military man like Belisarius could
present to him.
Later Byzantine historians largely shared Procopius and
Agathias respect for Narses.41

In the twelfth century, a

successful eunuch-commander could be described as a new

Narses.42

Somewhat

more

surprisingly,

non-Byzantine

Western sources from the sixth to the eighth century have

passed down generally respectful portraits of Narses as well.
Importantly for our purposes, even Western sources that
subscribed to Narses anachronistic betrayal of Italy to the
Lombards first found in a Western chronicle from 616, portray
Narses reasoning for the betrayal in a sympathetic light. 43

40 Justinians predecessors Marcian (ruled 450-457), Leo I (ruled 457-474), Zeno (ruled
474-5, 476-91), Basiliscus (ruled 475/6), Justin I (ruled 518-27) all began their careers as
humble soldiers (the exception, Anastasius ruled 491-518, served as a palace official
before surprisingly being named emperor).

41 See e.g. John Malalas, Chronicle 484, 486, Evagrius, Ecclesiastical History 4.24, John
of Ephesus, Church History 3.1.39.

42 Tougher, Eunuch, 152.

43 Indeed, it is the lack of respect on the part of the empress towards Narses symbolised
by her gendered jibe that because he was a eunuch, that on his return to
Constantinople she would send him back to the womens chambers where he could rule
over wool-makers not over nations that drove his revenge

18

Okay, Narses was just one eunuch and rather exceptional at

that, so to close, let me turn to a final powerful eunuch from
seventh century-Italy.

(Italy at the opening of the Seventh Century)

By the second decade of the seventh century, Byzantine rule in
Italy was in deep trouble. The imperial government in
Constantinople found itself in the midst of a final fight for
survival with its long-time nemesis from the East, the Persian
Empire. Lombards and native Italians, took advantage of the
19

disarray, and around 615, the Byzantine exarch and a number

of imperial officials were murdered in Ravenna. Though
embroiled in the fight with Persia, in the spring of 616, the
emperor

Heraclius

sent

the

Patrician

and

chamberlain

Eleutherios to exact revenge and restore order. In this task the

eunuch was largely successful. After visiting the Pope in Rome,
Eleutherios led an army to Naples, where, according to a near
contemporary source, he fought his way against the usurper
and killed the upstart and many others with him. His further
attack

against

the

Lombards,

however,

stalled,

forcing

Eleutherios to sign a treaty with the Lombard king. Though the

details are murky, Eleutherios successes seemed to have gone
to his head, and our Western sources tells us that in 619 he
rebelled against Heraclius, and attempted to have himself
name Western Emperor.44 His reign, if we can call it that, did
not last long, on his way to Rome to rally support, he was
killed by imperial troops and his head sent to Constantinople.
Whether we accept this tale as 100% accurate matters little
for our purposes today. That all three of our Western sources
from the seventh to the eighth centuries find it possible that a
44 Liber Pontificallis, Vita Boniface ch. 2.

20

eunuch could aspire to such heights seems significant. This

should not surprise since these writers were probably familiar
with other powerful eunuchs in Italy, some who were far from
perfect servants and sought to carve for themselves a position
in the political quagmire of early Medieval Italy. Indeed,
Eleutherios would not be the last eunuch exarch to scheme
against his superior in Constantinople.
A colleague suggested to me recently that Eleutherios could
not have been a eunuch. This position, I replied, tells us more
about modern attitudes towards eunuchs, than the nuanced
depictions we find in the early medieval literature.

21

(A Byzantine eunuch attacks the Arabs: thirteenth-century

Madrid Skylitzes)

Eunuchs had certainly come a long way since Eutropius had

been stripped of his consulship and mocked for his holding of a
military command. Eunuchs would continue to serve as
exarchs in Italy until the exarchate fell in 751. 45 In Byzantium
they

continued

until

the

thirteenth

century

to

wield

considerable power. This is not to claim that eunuchs after the

fifth century were always treated in non-gendered ways.
Eunuch-commanders who experienced defeat on the field of
battle could expect to face gendered and, at times, eunuchspecific vitriol.46 I suspect that Narses may have faced similar
criticism if he had ever been defeated in battle.
Yet, I hope that I have shown today that eunuchs like Solomon,
Narses, and Eleutherios had broken through some of the
barriers of the prejudicial Roman attitudes towards eunuchs.
Far from being just a creation of pure political necessity, by the

45 An excellent summery of the Byzantine exarchate is found in Deborah Mauskopf

Deliyannis, Ravenna in Late Antiquity (Cambridge University Press, 2010), 201-287.

46See e.g., John Skylitzes, A Synopsis of Byzantine History16.8 [324]). For a

discussion of these later negative accounts, see Tougher, Eunuch, 103-104.
22

seventh century, eunuchs in early Medieval Italy had become a

vital signifier of imperial status, and, at times, manly martial
Romanitas.

One, indeed, need only to watch a few episodes of the recent

television drama Game of Thrones to realize that eunuchs
continue to translate, transport, and transmit Byzantine
culture over five hundred and sixty years after Constantinople
fell to the Turks.

23

Thank you
Final slide

Some High-Ranking Byzantine Military Eunuchs 600-1100

Seventh Century
Eluetherios-Koubikoularios under Heraclius. Exarch of Italy.
Leontios-Syrian eunuch who served in a military role in the reign of Phokas (ruled 602-610
Manuel-Armenian general served in Egypt. Retook Alexandria from Arabs, but later killed in battle.
Olympius-Koubikoularios and exarch of Italy (649). Defeated by Arabs in battle in Sicily.
Theodore-General of the East, killed at the battle of Yarmuk in 636.
Eighth Century
Eutychios-Exarch of Italy from 727-751.
John-In 781 he led the forces that defeated the Arabs at the battle of Melon.
Staurakios-Supporter of Empress Eirene who campaigned against the Slavs in 783.
Theodore-Strategos of Sicily from 782-788.
Ninth century
Procopius-Co-commander of the troops in Italy during the reign of Basil I (ruled 867-886).
Theoktistos-Served in the reigns of Michael II and Michael III. Led campaign against the Arabs.
Tenth Century
Constantine Gongylios- Served as droungarios of an expedition against Crete in 949.
Damianos-Droungarios during Zoes regency for Constantine VII.
Eustathios-Strategos of Calabria in 920.
Michael- Oversaw the fleet in Crete in 960.
Niketas- Droungarios of the fleet in Sicily.
Nicholas-Commander in chief of the army. Defeated the Arabs in battle.
Romanos the Bulgar-Strategos of Abydos.
Peter-Stratopedarch in Cilcia. Served in numerous battles against the Arabs and Rus. Fell in Basil II
campaing against Bardas Skleros.
Theophanes-Defeat the Rus in a naval battle in 941.
Eleventh Century
Basil-Killed in battle with Pechenegs in 1053.
Basil Pediates-Shared command of the army in Sicily.
Constantine the Saracen-strategos autokrator who led campaigns in Armnia.
Eustathios Kyminianos- Droungarios under Alexios I who defended Constantinople.
John the protovestiarios- Besieged the Turks in Nicea in 1080.
George Probatas-Headed an army sent against the Serbs in1040.

24

Leo Nikerites- Commander who escorted the Pechenegs to Constantinople in 1086.

Michael Spondyles-Doux of Antioch, defeated by Arabs in 1027, led campaign to Siciliy in 1038.
Nikephoros- Strategos Autokrator defeated by Pechenegs in battle in 1049.
Orestes-Protospatharios sent by Basil II to fight the Arabs in Sicily.
Stephen- Strategos and autokrator who defeated George Maniakes in 1043.
Symeon- Under Romanus III he was the domestic of the scholai, and led a campaign in the East.

25